Agroscope Study Ignores Constitution and the Will of the People

A coalition of over a hundred scientists rejects the Agroscope study on the drinking water initiative as scientifically untenable and misleading.

While the study confirms that the drinking water initiative would have a positive impact on drinking water and water body protection as well as biodiversity within Switzerland,

Agroscope simultaneously attributes massive environmental consequences abroad to the initiative, up to and including the deforestation of rainforests. It is precisely this argument of a «larger ecological footprint» abroad than at home that the Council of States’ Committee for Economic Affairs and Taxation (WAK-S) used to justify a suspension of agricultural policy.

«From a scientific perspective, the conclusions of the Agroscope study on the drinking water initiative are not tenable», criticises Martin Würsten, representative of 4aqua. «Our main criticism is that Agroscope failed to take into account important existing constitutional provisions.» Anyone wishing to form their own view of the Agroscope study is recommended to read page 104, where it is outlined how the «undesirable effects of the drinking water initiative (TWI) could be prevented.» These include, among others:

• Efficient and site-appropriate use of domestic agricultural land
• Setting standards in current import countries of origin or sourcing exclusively from eco-efficient production systems
• Selection of specific countries of origin
• Avoiding food waste

All of these aspects are already enshrined as constitutional objectives in the articles on agriculture (Art. 104 FC) and food security (Art. 104a FC). They must be implemented by the time the TWI comes into force (after an eight-year transition period). «Agroscope should have been required to include these factors in the analysis of the environmental impacts of the DWI. Only then would a realistic forecast have been possible and the potential for a successful implementation of the initiative become apparent», criticizes Würsten. With regard to water quality, Agroscope summarizes (p. 103): «Implementation of the Drinking Water Initiative would in all likelihood improve water quality in Switzerland. From a global perspective, however, this positive effect would be offset by greater water pollution in other countries, and it would be accompanied by further trade-offs in other environmental areas.» The second sentence of this conclusion has since been repeatedly cited and instrumentalized by opponents of the DWI — most recently by the majority of the WAK-S.

«Effective measures to limit agricultural water pollution are urgently needed, as approximately one million people in the Swiss Mittelland currently receive drinking water that fails to meet food law standards due to pesticide residuest», warns Martin Würsten. Added to this are contamination from nitrates and antibiotic resistance.

With their study, Agroscope implies that addressing these shortcomings would have to come at the cost of greater environmental burdens abroad. 4aqua firmly rejects this claim. Switzerland has every means to protect its domestic waters without causing environmental harm abroad. Switzerland even has a duty to do so, as the food security article adopted by a large majority of the public in 2017 stipulates that the Federal Council must establish sustainable trade relations in the agricultural and food sector. According to Würsten, this could be achieved, for example, through a certification system for imported foodstuffs, which would ensure that the production of imported food does not result in negative environmental consequences abroad.

The largest share of the negative environmental effects abroad is based on Agroscope's calculated need for additional meat imports of approximately 62,000 tonnes per year, or just under 12% of current domestic consumption. In other words: a reduction in meat consumption of just 12% would render additional imports unnecessary, and the environmental effects abroad would be eliminated. Such a reduction could be achieved through the reduction of food waste alone (currently 30% for beef), to which Switzerland has committed itself under constitutional food security article 104a as well as the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

«Had Agroscope taken the applicable constitutional law into account, the overall balance of the TWI would have been positive both domestically and abroad», concludes Würsten.4aqua therefore rejects the TWILCA study as misleading and calls for its revision.

The misleading and false claims that opponents of the agricultural initiatives have deployed against the Drinking Water Initiative (TWI) have reached a scale that overshadows most previous referendum campaigns.